Hillary Declares. Let the Misogyny Begin.

No sooner had Hillary Clinton officially declared her presidential candidacy than the bigoted assholes of the religious right started spewing misogyny. Don Feder of the World Congress of Families got it started by arguing that “Hitlery” (Get it? That’s so clever!) will never be president because she’s so hideously ugly.

Think Evita after Botox treatments. Think Madame Defarge on a bad hair day. Think Lady Macbeth with serious issues (“Out, out, damned bimbo!”).

To listen to the babbling heads, you’d think the Goldwater girl-turned-Alinsky-disciple could start preparing her acceptance speech (maybe Eleanor Roosevelt will help her write it). “Ooh, she’ll raise so much money.” “Ooh, women want a woman president.” In the immortal words of General Anthony McAuliffe: “Nuts!”

Win the White House? Hillary couldn’t win a popularity contest if she was the only contestant.

Here are the Top Ten Reasons Hillary Rodham Clinton is more likely to become a Victoria’s Secret lingerie model than the next president…

10. The Hideousness Factor – Lyndon Baines Johnson was the last profoundly ugly candidate to be elected president, and he was a legacy of the martyred JFK. Voters don’t want a leader who looks frazzled or frumpy. We’re told that Lincoln was too homely to be elected president in an age of television and paparazzi. But Lincoln’s homely face had a dignity, a gravitas. If nothing else, we want a face that reassures us, not one that scares us, a la Night of the Living Alinskyites.

Don’t you love how he assumes that everyone else is a much of a sexist douchebag as he is?

POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • wreck

    Don Feder kinda looks like he fell out of the ugly tree himself. And hit every branch on the way down:

    http://freethinker.co.uk/2012/07/08/pickles-in-a-pickle-over-persecuted-christians-lawsuit/

  • bmiller

    Damn, wreck. I’m thinking “Dr. Gaius on a very bad hair (and beard) day”

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    To be fair, she is a girl. Much like Moochelle Hussein Obama, she has to expect these perfectly legitimate criticisms.

  • Moon Jaguar

    Clearly Feder is channeling his inner nine-year-old who thinks girls are just gross. I’m surprised cooties wasn’t one of his ‘factors’.

  • matty1

    Out of ten reasons given only the first three strike me as remotely plausible reasons people may not vote for her.

    -The presidency normally changes parties after an incumbent gets two terms

    -There are lot of scandals real and invented that opponents can throw at her

    -She can hardly run as a Washington outsider

    The rest come across just as reasons Don Feder doesn’t like her, not arguments anyone else would listen to

  • raven

    Don Feder of the World Congress of Families

    Don Feder has an ugly mind. He would have an ugly soul if souls existed.

    PS The word family in the organization title is a tell. Any group with Family, Freedom, or Patriot is likely to be bottom of the barrel christofascist.

    This BTW is Groupspeak. Groupspeak is a sign of a cult.

  • brucegee1962

    You could scour this country from one end to the other, and I doubt you’d find anyone who was surprised about this rhetoric. We can expect a steady stream swamp of it (possibly even more than the racism of the last eight years) during a Clinton presidency.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    Much as I despise both Clintons, I can’t help but feel some sympathy for Ms C as she prepares to undergo more woman-hating than any other individual in history.

    The previous record holder, Marie Antoinette, endured the hostility of a nation with less than 10% of the population of the modern US, and her slanderers had no equipment more advanced than hand-operated presses. Clinton will catch hell from a much more advanced slander machine run by a less inhibited, more feral gang of hatemongers with billions in funding.

    What this will do to gender relations in the US I shudder to think. If Clinton somehow manages to win the election, the barrage will continue, nonstop, and the splash effect will enter everyones’ lives.

  • raven

    Hillary does have on disadvantage. Overexposure. She’s been too visible for too long.

    1. People tend to like new and somewhat unknown candidates. Like John Kennedy, Reagan, Carter, or Obama.

    Guessing, because then they can project their hopes and fears onto them. Obama did run on a hope and change platform. That is, vote for the imaginary candidate in their head versus the real one.

    2. Rand Paul is gaining from this. Young, not well known, trying desperately to pretend to be a normal, reasonable person. While being anything but that.

    3. That being said, like many I’m lukewarm about Hillary. OTOH, I’m horrified by all the GOP candidates. George Bush started the morass of Iraq and nothing I can do about it. Except oppose and vote against his equally evil brother, Jeb. Lukewarm beats horror any day.

  • lofgren

    “Begin?” Where have you been for the past forever?

  • http://onhandcomments.blogspot.com/ left0ver1under

    What else would one expect from intellectually weak minds?

    They’re so intellectually weak that they can’t grasp there are enough valid reasons to oppose Clinton (e.g. the state department email scandal, Whitewater, she’s the 1%ers’ dream candidate, etc.) without resorting to insults and made up nonsense.

  • dingojack

    Ah the good ol’ PoG — showing their skills at winning the female vote – yet again!

    Dingo

  • nemistenem

    Damn, I’m not a fan of hers by most measures, but relative to anything the R’s have to offer she stands now in my mind as the lesser of the evils, so to speak. And I’m inclined to vote for her just to stick my finger in the eyes of assholes like this!

  • scienceavenger

    Ugh, here we go. Not with the sexism, although I’m sure we’ll get plenty of that. But with claiming nearly every criticism of Hillary is sexist. I’ve been saying for years that physical attractiveness is very relevant in getting elected president in the TV era – just ask Nixon. Does that make me a sexist if I said the same of Hillary (which, ironically enough, I’ve never felt compelled to do)? I saw that stupid list put out by her campaign about supposedly sexist language reporters should not use. It was an embarrasment, easily 3/4 of the terms are boilerplate political language and are not sexist. Hillary’s supporters do her no favors jumping on every criticism of her as sexist – better to wait for the obvious examples (like asking her how she can manage being president whil being a grandmother), else you be viewed the same way Al Sharpton is every time he screams “racism”, or Rudy Guiliani is whenever he says “9/11”.

    I know I’m clanging the bell while the train rumbles by. Carry on with the outrage. Just realize that if this is how low you are setting the bar, you’re preaching to the choir while everyone else is rolling their eyes at you.

  • StevoR

    Lyndon Baines Johnson was the last profoundly ugly candidate to be elected president,

    Maybe we have differing standards of ugliness but Reagun and the two Bushes were not exactly the most handsome or charming of people . In many senses of the ‘ugly’ word.

    If physical beauty was the key wouldn’t that haircut guy have won back in 2008?

  • StevoR

    Lincoln’s homely face had a dignity, a gravitas.

    A stovepipe hat and a beard to cover it?

    Also Hilary doesn’t? (Have the gravitas and dignity I mean – not the stovepipe hat!)

  • StevoR

    Confusing a political election with a Miss America campaign – how does that work again?

    Also, guess that shitstain has forgotten the old adage about “politics being showbiz being showbiz for ugly people.”

  • thebookofdave

    We are on the verge of transition to a postsexist society. I can hardly wait for the general election.

  • colnago80

    Re StevoR @ #15

    In fairness, Ronnie the rat was a handsome man during his movie career. Even so, he was never an A list actor.

  • colnago80

    Re scienceavenger @ #14

    Well, Jimmy peanut wasn’t exactly a matinee idol either.

  • dingojack

    SLC – I hear that the chimp got far more fan mail*…

    :) Dingo

    ———–

    * more handsome AND a better actor too

  • StevoR

    Hey, isn’t Michelle Obama generally “conventionally” (for whatever that’s qworth) considered prettier /sexier /more attractive than Hilary? Reckon the Repubs would be happier with *her* as POTUS?

    (Incidentally I wouldn’t rule that out or eventually Obama’s daughters either. Nor would I mind.)

  • http://festeringscabofrealityblogspot.com fifthdentist

    Good thing the Republicans have such studmuffins as Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee and theat Santorum guy waiting in the wings to woo the wimmins’ vote. Not to mention Donald Trump, who, if he decides (wink, wink) to enter the race would be the sexiest presidential candidate in the history of ever.

    As far as “Hitler,” I think it’s only fair to give them doses of their own medicine. I think Mario von Rubintrop and Rand Pohl.*

    * Only problem is, ‘baggers don’t know any other names of Nazis from the Third Reich besides Hitler and thus wouldn’t get the references.

  • JustaTech

    StevoR @22: That’s an excellent question: has anyone who grew up in the White House (actually lived thee while their father was president) gone on to run for President? Or were they all too scarred by the experience? (Maybe some of the Roosevelt boys?)

  • ZugTheMegasaurus

    This guy seems very well read, considering that he’s apparently a five year old. No adult would seriously make the “you’re an ugly doodoo head” argument, right?

  • dingojack

    ZugTheMegasaurus – your comment and that of JustaTech’s reminded me of some advice that the English Ambassador gave to a functionary before he met the then US President, Teddy Roosevelt:

    ‘When it comes to the President, it pays to remember – he’s about five’.

    😉 Dingo

  • http://cheapsignals.blogspot.com Gretchen

    scienceavenger:

    Ugh, here we go. Not with the sexism, although I’m sure we’ll get plenty of that. But with claiming nearly every criticism of Hillary is sexist. I’ve been saying for years that physical attractiveness is very relevant in getting elected president in the TV era – just ask Nixon. Does that make me a sexist if I said the same of Hillary (which, ironically enough, I’ve never felt compelled to do)?

    No.

    It does, however, make you rather dim if you honestly can’t tell the difference between noting that attractiveness is relevant in getting elected, and just bashing Hillary Clinton for being unattractive.

    It also doesn’t speak highly of your intellect if you fail to acknowledge that the fact of being a woman is what makes her attractiveness (or lack thereof) roughly a billion times more important to people who think the relevant feature of a woman in any capacity is whether she’s attractive. That is, to misogynists.

    And by the way, nobody here claimed that any criticism of Hillary Clinton is sexist. Nobody. So you can put that strawman back in the field it came from as well.

  • rietpluim

    “World Congress of Families”?

  • rietpluim

    Why do these loons always pick such presumptuous names for their organizations? Anyway, this bigot makes me wish I could vote for Clinton.

  • felidae

    When you are desperate, an ad hominem attack is all ya got

  • lofgren

    And by the way, nobody here claimed that any criticism of Hillary Clinton is sexist. Nobody. So you can put that strawman back in the field it came from as well.

    I don’t think that scienceavenger is saying that anybody said that any criticism of Clinton is sexism. He’s describing a behavior, not an argument. Not that I am agreeing with him, just saying it’s not a strawman. I don’t know what the word for this kind of fallacy is, but if there isn’t one then there should be.

  • sabrekgb

    In the immortal words of General Anthony McAuliffe: “Nuts!”

    …the fuck? What does that quote have to do with anything…? Does he even know the context of it, or did he just like the word? Fucking people can’t even History, i swear.

  • llewelly

    lofgren:

    I don’t think that scienceavenger is saying that anybody said that any criticism of Clinton is sexism.

    Here’s what scienceavenger actually said:

    scienceavenger:

    But with claiming nearly every criticism of Hillary is sexist.

    The qualifier “nearly” is not enough to make it not a strawman. It’s still a strawman.